Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35416591›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutical medicine2022

Chaos to Clarity: Pragmatic Approaches to Overcome Challenges for Successful Implementation of Additional Risk Minimisation Measures in the European Union and the UK by a Marketing Authorisation Holder.

Kalindi Hapani, Nipa Parikh, Krystle Pianka, Harshil Patel

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kalindi HapaniAPCER Life Sciences, 1601 & 1602, Mondeal Heights, Wing A, Iskcon Cross Rd, Ramdev Nagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380015, India. khapani@yahoo.co.in.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4067-0733
Nipa ParikhOtsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Krystle PiankaOtsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Harshil PatelAPCER Life Sciences, 1601 & 1602, Mondeal Heights, Wing A, Iskcon Cross Rd, Ramdev Nagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380015, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost national competent authorities issue guidance on the dissemination and implementation of additional risk minimisation measures (aRMMs), like the European Medicines Agency. However, national competent authorities guidance includes additional regulatory requirements, the reasons for which are unclear.

objectivesThe purpose of this study was to identify significant barriers to risk management implementation and methodological challenges encountered by local safety managers in the European Union and the UK owing to differences in country-specific regulations and regional national competent authorities guidance.

methodsThe European Medicines Agency and national competent authorities guidance for each of the aRMM programme's formative components were compared. A survey was conducted to ascertain the challenges encountered by local safety managers throughout the implementation phases and the responses analysed.

resultsTwenty-seven national guidance documents were compared with the European Medicines Agency's guidance, and it was observed that national competent authorities provide additional aRMM dissemination and implementation parameters for the format and layout of aRMM, translation requirements, guidance on aRMM content, submission requirements, monitoring parameters and aRMM update requirements, among others. The survey was completed by 11 out of 21 local safety managers (52.38%). Eight local safety managers rated submission of an implementation plan as the most challenging aspect. Multiple national competent authorities requests, frequent updates, and delayed approval impacted planning and implementation, resulting in modifications and delays. Moreover, the study discovered that managing frequent version updates of digital aRMMs was challenging, and most national competent authorities neglected the post-implementation phase activities. Further, most local safety managers followed both the local and global processes to maintain documentation of aRMM implementation.

conclusionsIt was evident that the European Medicines Agency and national competent authorities empower marketing authorisation holders to implement and disseminate aRMM materials tailored to their local healthcare settings. However, this poses a challenge for marketing authorisation holders because of a lack of clarity in guidance in executing an aRMM programme and an added burden of complying with both European Medicines Agency and national competent authority requirements.

Indexed as

MarketingRisk ManagementEuropean UnionUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.